Why is Carl Froch in the top 10 p4p?

Actually, given your history of which fighters you back, I can totally see why you're not too big on resumes lol. Get the fuck out of here, idiot. You are literally one of the least knowledgable, limited and least upright posters on the board and that says a lot.

 

Slyk you still haven't answered as to why you are bias against British fighters?

 

hail Carl Froch KING of England and P4P Boss !!

 

Long live the King :respect:soccerbl::soccerred

 

HMMM Go on then name 100 active fighters more deserving.....stupid comment :nono

 

TKO6 :good

 

He's got one of the better resumes at the moment, even if his skills don't look that sharp. He just has a way of winning, and knocking guys out in fights he was losing on points.

 

^This.

 

I'm not saying Froch is terrible, doesn't have the attributes you mention or that those attributes aren't important but do you really think Froch would beat Danny Garcia, Gamboa or Donaire if they were the same size? Or even GGG or Kovalev?

Did you have Kessler in the top 10 when he beat Froch?

Edit; To the bolded - Just thought I'd add that just like you say about resume, being no.1 in your division also demonstrates your competence against your peers.

 

Have Golovkin or Kovalev beaten anybody as good as Froch ?

 

No. Froch also hasn't beaten anyone as good as them imo but the question was who do people honestly think would win if they were the same size? I would definitely favour the guys I mentioned.

 

i don't have a top 10, i prefer to think of groupings of fighters, but even that is subjective. in truth, unless someone really stands out (like floyd,) it's something of a coin toss who wins, otherwise we'd all have near 100% prediction records. froch has won a lot of fights that based on skill you'd tip him to lose.

the question was why is froch lb for lb top 10, i'm giving my subjective answer.

 

As far as i'm concerned the jury is still out on Golovkin and Kovalev, although you could argue that Golovkins opposition has been marginally better than Kovalevs. At this point in time Kovalevs best win is Cleverly, and in all honesty most people didn't think that Cleverly was actually world class anyways.
I could name numerous fighters who looked like world beaters as they climbed through the ranks, fighters who either blasted there opposition out of the ring, and/or danced circles around them, BUT lots of them came unstuck at the highest level.
Froch on the other hand may not be pleasing on the eye to the purist, and he may not have one punch concussive power, but he's a PROVEN winner at the highest level.
Rewind 10 weeks, and people were suggesting that Broner was the next P4P #1 !

 

Fair enough. I'm just providing the counter-argument making for an interesting debate.